Election results for Gilpin County residents

More Voting Options this Year by Heather Worrell Gilpin County’s voters had just a few things on this year’s ballot. Those located within the Boulder Valley School District voted upon District Directors. Proposition BB was presented by the State asking to keep the excess amount of taxes collected from the overestimated amount of taxes collected from marijuana. According to Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) laws, since it was over the budgeted amount it is required to ask the voters again if it is okay to keep the tax money they have already indicated they wish to collect for said specific purposes. Gilpin County’s specific issues included: Referred Issue 1A asking to remove term limits for the County Surveyor; 1B allowing the Commissioners to serve three consecutive terms if the voters chose to re-elect them; and 1C asking if Gilpin County residents would repeal State Senate Bill 152, which prohibits governments from assisting with any sort of communications or internet broadband infrastructure. Gilpin County voters were for the State retaining the already collected marijuana tax proceeds and for removing term limits for the County Surveyor position. Nearly 60% voted against Commissioners having the option to be re-elected for three consecutive terms. Gilpin voters felt strongly in voting yes for allowing the local government to participate in the improvement of broadband and communications infrastructure. Those in the Boulder Valley School District RE-2 voted for Shelly Benford in District A, Kathy Gebhardt in District C, and Sam Fuqua and Richard L. Garcia with the only candidates for Districts D and G respectively. This year’s voters in Gilpin County had the opportunity to vote by mailing in or dropping off their ballots at the 24-hour ballot drop-off box at the Community Center, or by voting in person at the voter service and polling center located at the old courthouse in Central City. If you elected to vote in-person you would visit a kiosk and have the option to vote electronically, or there were paper ballots available for those that preferred to not discard the traditional. This reporter decided to cast her vote on Election Day after not receiving her ballot in the mail due to my absolutely correct mailing address being marked as “undeliverable” by the postal service. I was directed to the kiosk and given some basic instructions on how I could adjust the screen to meet my needs. It was a touch screen computer equipped with a mouse and a headset to hear an audible version of the ballot if I preferred. It turns out that this kiosk also allows a disabled person to use any of their accessible devices to vote as well. I adjusted the screen to my liking and proceeded to cast my vote. I was able to go between the questions and make my selection, including the option to skip. I could return to questions I’d already responded to if that is what I wanted. Once I had cast my vote on the issues, I clicked a button marked “print.” The election judge advised me to come around the kiosk to pick up my printed ballot and then I could touch, feel and look over my printed paper ballot one last time before placing it in the ballot box. That concluded my electronic voting experience. It was fast, easy and looked just like a regular mail-in ballot I would normally drop off. There are eight counties in the state that were chosen to pilot four vendor programs by the Secretary of State, including Gilpin County. The Secretary’s office has supporting vendors competing for who gets the right to help with electronic voting. The feedback received from these counties, voter surveys, and election results will be shared at a presentation next week. Four different vendors have created what they believe to be the next generation of electronic voting equipment. Gilpin County Clerk’s office chose to work with the vendor, Clear Ballot. In sitting down in an interview with the Clear Ballot’s CEO Larry Moore, there was much to be learned about the user and behind the scenes experience of the election solutions they offer. It includes real-time reporting of scanned ballots, a document identification and organization system, and an overall simplification of the procedure. The process doesn’t deviate far from what voters are used to while still using a paper ballot with the ovals filled in. The electronic system and software organization of the results is incredibly precise and quick. A scanner and document tag are used to allow for immediate location of a ballot by a machine or human. A major concern for many is that an electronic system could fail. The computers all have 4-hour back-up batteries, and the data servers used are secure, include no internet connection, and are also on battery backups. Moore’s team explained the additional advantages of their system in allowing them to “pick a needle out of a haystack.” The process is completely transparent as the images record every mark for every candidate. Any over votes or under votes can be reviewed and adjudicated. A human can review the individual computer results and make appropriate determinations according to the image. This can save clerks thousands of dollars in the case of a hand count. Hand counts are incredibly time and resource intensive. Moore reported these hand counts are also the most inaccurate, especially in cases where a new ballot must be duplicated. Clear Ballot is also empowering County Clerks to manage their own ballot creation with a built-in common formatting tool that simultaneously handles the necessary document requirements. Gilpin Clerk & Recorder Colleen Stewart noted there are some enormous possible savings if Clear Ballot’s vendor contract is approved. She estimates that there would be a savings of $30-$40,000 with the use of the hardware and software. Moore reported that their other pilot county is the larger Adams County, and their Clerk & Recorder, Stan Martin, has conservatively estimated at least $80,000 in savings to his County for this year’s election. GILPIN COUNTY UNOFFICIAL ELECTION RESULTS Proposition BB (Statutory) – “May the State retain and spend state revenues that otherwise would be refunded for exceeding an estimate included in the ballot information booklet for proposition AA and use these revenues to provide forty million dollars for public school building construction and for other needs, such as law enforcement, youth programs, and marijuana education and prevention programs, instead of refunding these revenues to retail marijuana cultivation facilities, retail marijuana purchasers, and other taxpayers? Yes/For: 887 No/Against: 604 Gilpin County Referred Issue 1A – “Shall term limits imposed by Article XVIII, Section 11 of the Colorado Constitution upon the elected Surveyor of Gilpin County be eliminated in order that such elected officials continue to serve as long as the voters of Gilpin County re-elect such officials to office?” Yes/For: 798 No/Against: 689 Gilpin County Referred Issue 1B – “Shall term limits imposed by Article XVIII, Section 11 of the Colorado Constitution upon the elected County Commissioners of Gilpin County be modified in order that such elected officials may continue to serve for up to three (3) consecutive terms, if re-elected to such office?” Yes/For: 598 No/Against: 893 Gilpin County Referred Issue 1C – “Without increasing taxes, shall the citizens of Gilpin County, Colorado, re-establish their county’s right to provide all cable television service, telecommunication service and advanced service (high s peed internet access), as defined by statute, restricted since 2005 by Title 29, Article 27, of the Colorado Revised Statutes, including providing any new and improved broadband services a facilities based on future technologies, utilizing existing or new community-owned infrastructure, either directly or indirectly with public or private sector partners to potential subscribers that may include telecommunications service provider, residential or commercial user within the boundaries of Gilpin County?” Yes/For: 1,124 No/Against: 367 Boulder Valley School District RE-2 --Director District A Shelly Benford: 209 Denny McCloskey: 116 --Director District C Kathy Gebhardt: 141 Susan D. Femmer: 118 Chris Barge: 90 --Director District D Sam Fuqua: 283 --Director District G Richard L. Garcia: 278 Boulder Valley School District RE-2 Question 3A – “Without increasing taxes, shall Boulder Valley School District No. RE-2 be authorized to lease current excess capacity on its existing fiber optic networks or to otherwise provide high-speed internet services (advanced services), telecommunications services, and/or cable television services including any new and improved high bandwidth services based on future technologies, to schools, libraries, residents, businesses, nonprofit entities, and other users or subscribers of such services, either directly or indirectly, by contract and/or through s ale or purchase of resale or wholesale services, with public or private sector partners, as expressly permitted with voter approval by Article 27, Title 29 of the Colorado Revised Statutes?” Yes/For: 427 No/Against: 137

Election results for Gilpin County residents

Patrick Henry Sweeney

Related Posts

Keep the High Country Clean: Your Complete Guide to Waste Management with Timberline Disposal

When the Lights Go Out: Why Power Outages Are Becoming Part of Daily Life

Craig Station’s Final Chapter: Can Federal Intervention Save Moffat County’s Economic Lifeline?

Central City Has Never Been Afraid of Big Moments. Until Now.

Colorado’s Quiet Watch: How Real ID, License-Plate Cameras, and Ring Doorbells Are Building a Shadow Surveillance State—and What Citizens Can Still Do to Opt Out

About Us

Quick Links

News Categories

Weekly Newsletter

Welcome Back!

Retrieve your password

Are you sure want to unlock this post?

Are you sure want to cancel subscription?

Election results for Gilpin County residents

Support authors and subscribe to content

Subscribe

Related Posts

About Us

Quick Links

News Categories

Weekly Newsletter

Welcome Back!

Retrieve your password